RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Improved detection of antibody against SARS-CoV-2 by microsphere-based antibody assay
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.05.26.20113191
DO 10.1101/2020.05.26.20113191
A1 Carol Ho-Yan Fong
A1 Jian-Piao Cai
A1 Thrimendra Kaushika Dissanayake
A1 Lin-Lei Chen
A1 Charlotte Yee-Ki Choi
A1 Lok-Hin Wong
A1 Anthony Chin-Ki Ng
A1 Polly K.P. Pang
A1 Deborah Tip-Yin Ho
A1 Rosana Wing-Shan Poon
A1 Tom Wai-Hin Chung
A1 Siddharth Sridhar
A1 Kwok-Hung Chan
A1 Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan
A1 Ivan Fan-Ngai Hung
A1 Kwok-Yung Yuen
A1 Kelvin Kai-Wang To
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/26/2020.05.26.20113191.abstract
AB Objective Currently available COVID-19 antibody tests using enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or immunochromatographic assay have variable sensitivity and specificity. Here, we developed and evaluated a novel microsphere-based antibody assay (MBA) for the detection of immunoglobulin G (IgG) against SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein (NP) and spike protein receptor binding domain (RBD).Method We developed a microsphere-based assay (MBA) to determine the levels of IgG against SARS-CoV-2 NP and spike RBD. The seropositive cut-off mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) was set using a cohort of 294 anonymous serum specimens collected in 2018. The specificity was assessed using serum specimens collected from organ donors or influenza patients before 2020. Seropositive rate was determined among patients with COVID-19. Time-to-seropositivity and signal-to-cutoff (S/CO) ratio were compared between MBA and EIA.Results MBA had a specificity of 100% (93/93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 96-100%) for anti-NP IgG and 98.9% (92/93; 95% CI 94.2-100%) for anti-RBD IgG. The MBA seropositive rate for convalescent serum specimens of COVID-19 patients were 89.8% (35/39) for anti-NP IgG and 79.5% (31/39) for anti-RBD IgG. The time-to-seropositivity was shorter with MBA than that of EIA. When compared with EIA, MBA could better differentiate between COVID-19 patients and negative controls with significantly higher S/CO ratio for COVID-19 patients and lower S/CO ratio with negative controls. MBA also had fewer specimens in the equivocal range (S/CO 0.9-1.1) than EIA.Conclusion MBA is robust and simple, and is suitable for clinical microbiology laboratory for the accurate determination of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody for retrospective diagnosis, serosurveillance, and vaccine trials.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was partly supported by the donations of Richard Yu and Carol Yu, May Tam Mak Mei Yin, the Shaw Foundation Hong Kong, Michael Seak-Kan Tong, Respiratory Viral Research Foundation Limited, Hui Ming, Hui Hoy and Chow Sin Lan Charity Fund Limited, Chan Yin Chuen Memorial Charitable Foundation, Marina Man-Wai Lee, the Hong Kong Hainan Commercial Association South China Microbiology Research Fund, the Jessie & George Ho Charitable Foundation, Perfect Shape Medical Limited, and Kai Chong Tong; and funding from the Health and Medical Research Fund (grant no. COVID190124), the Food and Health Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; the National Program on Key Research Project of China (grant no. 2020YFA0707500 and 2020YFA0707504); the Consultancy Service for Enhancing Laboratory Surveillance of Emerging Infectious Diseases and Research Capability on Antimicrobial Resistance for Department of Health of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government. The funding sources had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the report.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:UW 13-265All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesIhave followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data will be submitted with the manuscript in different files